Slashdot Mirror
Fines Fail To Curb Cell Phone Usage While Driving
andylim writes "An in-depth study of over 14,000 London drivers by the Transport Research Laboratory has found an increase in the number of London motorists making and taking calls using their handsets at the wheel between 2008 and 2009, even though harsher penalties were introduced in 2007. It seems that most people, at least in London, still don't respect the fact that there's a much higher risk of being involved in an accident if you're using your cell phone."
It's the enforcement. We have really, really high fines here for all sorts of traffic violations, but enforcement is so lacking that it almost seems random. Your chances of getting caught are miniscule, so people learn to ignore the law. If they do get caught, the fines are staggering - but the one in ten thousand chance of getting caught is not a deterrent.
I'm using my I-Phone right now to ma
I think they're going about it all wrong. Children are much more distracting to drivers in my experience. I can't count the number of times I have almost wrecked trying to pick up a pacifier, etc.
London should prohibit driving with children in the car. It's an inconvenience for parents, but it's a safety issue. Likewise car radios should be banned.
Not just in London, I think you will find that this is the case everywhere in the world...
Basic human behavior, and it's hardly restricted to cellphone misuse behind the wheel. You see, everyone is somehow special and better able to handle a given situation than anyone else, and is therefore immune to consequence. That is, until such time as a consequence kills them dead, or if they're very lucky just scares the shit out of them. Cigarettes, drugs, risky sex, bad driving ... most people don't learn to think until after their stupidity nearly kills them. I don't have a problem with that, particularly, unless their mental malfunction gets someone else killed. That's what makes using that damn cellphone on the road a bad thing.
Wise up people, you're no better at driving and texting than anyone else, and nobody is any good at it.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Hands-free devices do little to reduce accidents. The big thing that causes accidents while using cell phones is the fact that most people devote most of their attention to the conversation.
When someone is with you in the car they can see the road conditions just as well as you can. They will often shut up when you are in a tense situation that needs your focus. When someone is on a cell phone they will chatter away regardless and your attention will be divided.
If you're going to use a cell phone in a car you have to be willing to tell the person on the other end to shut up for a bit when you need to and to be able to recognize when you need to. And the person at the other end has to recognize that this isn't rudeness on your part, but a basic safety precaution.
In reality, as I mentioned in another post, driving is a horrible deplorable waste of human time and attention. It would be better done by machines. The next best would be to have it done by a very small few in society so only their time was wasted, but people seem allergic to public transportation.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
The problem with that argument is that if someone else fucks up, you or I may be affected by the consequences in terrible ways that no amount of compensation or punishment inflicted on the other party could correct.
I was almost hit by some asshat teenager in a SUV two weeks ago because he was texting on his fucking phone in the middle of the night while doing 70mph down a freeway I ended up in the ditch avoiding the lil fuck. Police should fine them and confiscate the phone and have it destroyed. Talking and driving is one thing but to be so stupid as to fucking text and drive is an entirely different thing. Hell throw in a 6month license suspension if they get pulled over for texting and driving. I hope anyone who texts and drive hits a bridge at 80mph and dies in a painful and messy manner. If you didn't notice I really hate people who text and drive.
Have they tried educating rather than penalising? Strange as it may see, most of us respond positively to scientific fact rather than an impersonal fine. Who can say why this takes place?
Man, what alternate universe do you live in? Whichever it is, I want to go there--a large percentage of the people in my universe don't seem to respond to any sort of fact, scientific or otherwise. Only a cold, hard dose of reality (such as running their car into a fire hydrant at the end of their driveway) ever gets through to them.
This ain't rocket surgery.
It's the enforcement. We have really, really high fines here for all sorts of traffic violations, but enforcement is so lacking that it almost seems random. Your chances of getting caught are miniscule, so people learn to ignore the law. If they do get caught, the fines are staggering - but the one in ten thousand chance of getting caught is not a deterrent.
Actually it's not the fines or enforcement. It's training. Every police vehicle I've seen has a laptop mounted on the center console. Every time I see a cop driving around they have one hand on the keyboard and constantly glance back and forth between the road and the computer.
Cell phones and cars aren't going away anytime soon. Instead of punishing the citizens for doing something police are trained to do, train the citizens too. There is no reason that drivers ed. classes shouldn't discuss this and deal with it.
I think the best way to "think of the children" is to teach the children. If you don't want little Lisa to text and drive into a horrible wreck, teach her how to text and drive responsibly. Otherwise take your blanket statements and have every computer removed from police vehicles because otherwise we have an effective working double standard which provides revenue to the police force. Fuck that shit.
First of all, you cannot train folks to multitask because humans are incapable of doing it. The cops can't do it either. What you call multitasking is actually them selecting attention rapidly between their laptops and driving - if they're even doing that.
Two, even if it were possible to train folks how to do it, what makes you think that folks will follow their training? People are trained not to tailgate, speed, cut others off, etc...
Everything you've proposed is impossible. The ONLY solution is to ban cell phones in cars. There is absolutely no reason to talk in a car anyway - no exceptions. Got to talk? Pull over.
It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
Have they tried educating rather than penalising? Strange as it may see, most of us respond positively to scientific fact rather than an impersonal fine.
What planet do you live on? Facts don't dissuade people from doing what they want to do. A lot of it in this case is self-overestimation: people will continue to cell/text/IM while they drive because in spite of the evidence, they are all convinced that they are an exception to the rule and can do these things and still drive safely. In their minds, those studies and laws apply to all those other people, not me. It's very reminiscent of "well, most people probably shouldn't drive after drinking, but I can do it just fine."
I think the best way to "think of the children" is to teach the children. If you don't want little Lisa to text and drive into a horrible wreck, teach her how to text and drive responsibly.
How about teaching little Lisa to keep both hands on the wheel, both eyes on the road, and her mind focused on driving? How about teaching her that that phone call or text can wait until she gets where she's going? How about teaching her that the world won't come to an end if she's not constantly in touch with her little friends 24/7?
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
I actually prefer talking on a cell phone to having a passenger talking to me. I have no problem at all ignoring the person on the cell phone when something comes up and then asking them to repeat themselves. Passengers make hand motions, which often tempts me to look at them, aside from my natural tendency to look at the person I'm talking to. With someone on speakerphone, I have no inclination to look at them, and I can very easily ignore them.
I'm just one person, and it's an anecdote, but I really don't think it's fair to say that all people are worse off while on a phone. I'm much better on a phone than with a passenger.
hard dose of reality (such as running their car into a fire hydrant at the end of their driveway) ever gets through to them.
In my universe that person would blame the fire hydrant...
by that logic, I can drive drunk as hell and it's okay, just so long as I don't hit anybody.
Reboot macht Frei.
ATT's crappy coverage strikes again.
In my universe that person would blame the fire hydrant...
In my universe, 12 hot women pop up and assert they are my lover.
I love fire-hydrants.
Just how many IFR Pilots do you know? (assuming you're not an Aviator yourself and more likely to know a few).
Take a flight on a fully-loaded 747, I'll bet even money the only two people who can fly that plane are already in the cockpit. I don't know what definition you have of 'rare', but IFR Pilots are, IMO.
Actually it's not the fines or enforcement. It's training.
Also look at pilots who must by law be on the radio while piloting a vehicle in 3 dimensions that falls out of the sky if you slow down too quickly or bank too sharply while going slow. They are taught aviate, navigate, communicate - in other words fly and know where you are before worrying about the communication part.
Even if you remove mobile phones, radios and all other electronics, what about all the other distractions on the road? What about the piece of newspaper that flys onto your windscreen? What about a baby that starts choking in the back seat?
Train people to cope with distractions while driving (making it part of the driving test) and you've got a much safer environment than one where they've been reduced to the point where a driver can no longer cope with one.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Anybody remember the days before call-waiting? Y'know the days when you called someone and if they were on it you'd get this thing called a busy signal? We live in an age where we expect people to be able to be in instant contact. I sent you a text message, you get it instantly. We IM people on the computer. Creating mobile phones allows us to call someone (or be called by someone) almost anywhere we go. Nolonger do we have, "Sorry I was at the grocery store for the past hour.." You get called while you are in front of the apples. Conversely, you can call home and find out from your wife what type of apple to get for the pie.
People have grown accustomed to this... this leash. There was a time when people didn't have cell phones or pagers for that matter. When you went to the movies, you went to the movies, and when you were in the car driving to grandmas house, she couldn't call you. Now she can call you, and I would bet that most people would answer the phone rather than wait until you could a) safely pull over or b) arrive at your destination before you answered the phone or checked to see who called and call them back.
Do I think that we'll ever change our behavior to where we don't have this desire to have instant contact? Nope, and with the young kids of today growing up with email being the slowest form of communication, they won't think twice about driving while on the phone, texting or whatever comes out next (video-conferencing via the center console mounted computer?).
How else do you punish adults other than restrict their rights or outright revoke them?
How about - YOU DON'T. Often many destructive behaviors carry their own penalty, let people live with the consequences of their own actions.
Not to mention, I thought we were trying to prevent people from doing something we didn't like - not apply random punishments at the whim of law enforcement. As the study shows, punishment does not generally deter or do anything to stop behavior, so even if you demand it stop punishment and removal of rights is not the answer, because it simply does not work. If it doesn't work, you have to think of something else, but you can't keep hitting yourself in the head with a hammer expecting the headache to go away.
Only community peer pressure or other factors can really have an effect in improving behavior.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I have no problem with allowing people to be stupid if it only endangers themselves. However, in the case of drink driving, or driving while distracted by a mobile phone other people get killed or injured through no fault of their own.
In 1971, the Essex, UK Police ran a public 16 lesson (1 hour theory + 1 hour practice) Advanced Police-style, Driving course.
... sound fun but it is very hard work.
At first, as a young academic, with 10 year's driving experience, it seemed pedestrian, until you had to drive at at least 40 MPH in a special police car with absolutely bald tyres, for an hour, on a skid pan, eg oil+soap+water, much slicker than ice. You learned abou front, rear and 4 wheel skids, how to get in, easy, out, and use them. Handbreak turns
At the end, two, including me, got a prize, the Police Class 1 test, the two winners drove one-way Chelmsford-2-Leeds ( M) in an un-marked Jaguar Police car with concealed lights and siren, that you were NOT allowed to use. To pass you had to average 80 MPH which meant that you had to constantly overtake traffic with 20+ MPH overtake speed. UK speed limit is 70 MPH.
If the Instructors had to use the lights and siren you failed, average <80, you failed. I passed with 80.1 MPH and was washed out for a week. At the time I could fly, and thus talk with ATC and watch the instruments, out the front window, and behind. A constant scan.
,
Texting while driving a car is insane! Voice is OK, only on Hands Free, and if you can master a clear sense of priorities, first drive safely, then talk. If I answer the phone in the car, an dont know the caller, I say "I am driving so, if traffic gets busy bear with me". For me the Baregg an Guberist tunnels, in rush hour, are the only places where I really have a problem. A stau in Guberist means the in-tunnel cell gets overloaded anyway.
I'd bet the farm you're naive attitude would Disappear after some drunk asshole killed your family.
Why should it? When I know whatever law was passed wouldn't have prevented it anyway, I wouldn't turn to the idea of "more government" for solace. Honestly I don't know what I would do, but again since I know it wouldn't stop anything that would literally be the last thing to occur to me to think of. Things like MADD and all started with a good intention but as always it's a noose that draws tighter around everyone, and saves no-one - at least from the laws they have passed. What does help are the awareness programs, spreading the notion of "designated driver", etc (which MADD has also championed). They should have stuck with doing things that helped.
If we couldn't make a totally global ban on all alcohol work (prohibition) no law is going to stop one guy from drinking - especially not the guy who drinks too much anyway. Those are the guys that get in fatal accidents.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley